Proposes a model aligning national assessments with learner-centred education, suggesting pathways for educational reform in developing nations.
This study addresses the critical misalignment between learner-centred education (LCE) pedagogies and national assessment systems, particularly predominant in developing countries, where traditional standardised tests persist despite curricular shifts toward competency-based, inclusive learning and education. Drawing on constructivism philosophy, Universal Design for Learning (UDL), and authentic assessment theory, the paper proposes the LEARN model, a conceptual framework designed to bridge this policy-practice gap by redefining national assessments as tools that reflect and support learner-centred principles. The model’s five components (i.e., Learner-Centred Design, Evidence of Competence, Adaptive to Context, Reflective and Feedback-Oriented, and Nationally Relevant and Scalable), prioritise performance-based tasks, contextual flexibility, formative feedback, and equity. Through a conceptual review of the literature, the paper highlights the systemic contradictions undermining LCE reforms, exemplified by cases particularly from Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, where high-stakes examinations perpetuate rote learning, despite policy endorsements of learner-centred pedagogies. The LEARN model offers actionable pathways for policymakers, curriculum designers, and educators to align national assessments with LCE goals, ensuring equitable evaluation of higher-order and relevant skills. Implications for teacher training, inclusive education, and national monitoring systems are discussed, positioning the model as a transformative tool for achieving Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4’s vision of quality education. The study concludes with a call for empirical validation of the LEARN conceptual model across diverse contexts to advance global assessment reform.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahovi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: